with large increases in the service population among undocumented. add that to comment if we can about the vision for care that whereby he might send to all of that. >> i would say that's one of the key reasons we need bright white going forward. first off, we need right way for people who have insurance. 70% of clients today have other insurance. medicare medicaid private insurance is not doing everything, but zero so they are not eligible for new aca coverage come miscellany to make we have the program to serve these communities, but also ryan white has developed to provide hiv health care services to immigrants donate to make sure we retain that expertise. >> is that the provision that hasn't been mentioned that will be relevant to undocumented folks, which is not passive

hospital requirements are going to be very important to undocumented populations as are the fact that hospitals have to report and document their policies and financial system policies are. is there going to be very important tools because the massachusetts, it charity care, financial elements for one that were not covered in that's true going forward. >> i also want to make sure we keep reform -- also a mechanism for the short columns to expand access to immigrants to the aca to quirk some of those funds and immigration reform. >> i want to emphasize being documented as part of communities and many organizations serve. they go to school with children,

they work with us. first and foremost the administration is committed to passing comprehensive immigration reform and that is one of those issues outside the clinical setting and will impact the health of communities in recent health insurance probably won't even touch. but let's keep our eye on the price of comprehensive immigration reform and better identify communities moving forward. >> in the front for a question. >> hi, my name is alyssa. i was just wondering what kind of resources are available and looking to become more aware of lgbt health issues to be more trained and more culturally sent it on the issues. are there any programs out there for providers specifically?

>> the administration has a wealth of resources, specifically targeting providers to serve the needs of lgbt communities. particularly assisting to meet the needs of lgbt communities. we were evaluating class standards, the culturally approved services standard for care to meet the needs of the lgbt community with advocates to better address their needs in the provider education to ensure what the department has available is forthcoming. i do think this is a conversation ongoing and partners on this panel have resources available to all services. >> as many organizations that do competency training and in many cases have partnered with the federal government and has tripled in size since the affordable care act at hhs has been interested in making sure

those young starting out providers have the opportunity to get cultural competency training. many trainers do that in various parts of the country. another major resources the joint commission. my parents are health care providers, so why not all about sometimes a little bit of attention between the standards set out and how providers feel they are actually equipped to meet the standards. when the commission establishes new standards that could nondiscrimination on the basis of orientation identity started a project to make cultural competency materials were widely available so clinicians thought that they have the tools to make that change. there's a monograph from the joint commission that pulls together resources for mayra has mentioned for the others.

>> hi, i work with whitman walker held and i'm happy to say they were often the anti-cascade remedy. here we do to a thick work in the community. the hiv community, lgbt community and we work towards a huge expense. no money out there to help us get there. we have issues where community-based organizations that have some business models suffer at the hands of one organization or one entity changing the policy. on one medication we went for a reimbursement model to replenishment model and it's taken almost a hundred thousand dollars out of our operating budget in two days. who is out there working across agencies, same as we move

towards aca what everybody has to compete on quality, you can't disrupt these business models and expect people to not be impact it all the way through. >> you have a very good point and i think one of the realities we know about the affordable care act is not everything will be perfect when it's implemented on day one. i'm not ..

these people need to be engaged. i encourage you to be doing more on the policy side. a lot of these news stakeholders that are coming may not know everything that they need to know. so we need to be doing as much as we can up front to educate people about standards of hiv care and different policy choices they make there will still be enough that we wanted in a better place. >> really i think it goes back

to the issue that the rules as we know them are being rewritten right now. if we are not involved as community members, groups that are providing care, and then we are going to be left out. with regard, it is not malice. there are simply so many moving pieces in making sure that the pieces that need to be there, the folks that need to be around the table are there so that our voices are heard at the policies are being crafted in the decisions made. >> i think that is a great idea. >> another example of where that same problem has arisen on different systems not necessarily interacting with each other, california moved early to expand coverage and there were some unanticipated situations. because the state agency was not talking to the bright white

folks. fortunately the communities came together and were able to mitigate it. the rest of the country is learning from this experience. this is happening as we share this information and we often look to it because a lot of them are on sure. part of it is getting your story out there. >> i think that you might have all grabbed this report coming out. is it next month? april? you guys have ideas and questions, not certainly can affect how this will be implemented. it affects what we can do to resolve things that we perhaps i'm thinking about. >> thank you very much. thank you all for coming out. thank you to our awesome panel. it we will continue the conversation and they will be

here. [applause] >> coming up on c-span2 tonight, military officials on the u.s. ability to defend itself against iranian and north korean threats. in the head, on the state of the u.s. housing market. later, general martin dempsey speaks about the future of u.s. engagement in the persian gulf. >> 34 years ago today, we begin providing televised access to the everyday workings of congress and the federal government. c-span networks were created by america's cable company since 1979 and brought to you if a it's a public service by your television provider. >> top military officials

testified tuesday on capitol hill. it included the u.s. ability to defend itself from iranian or north korean threats. cybersecurity, and the syrian civil war. this is two hours and 35 minutes. >> good morning, everybody. this morning the committee continues its review of the missions and operational requirements of our combatant commanders in preparation for consider your fiscal year 2014. the national defense budget request. we welcome the commander of u.s. command in europe. general charles jacoby junior, commander of north american

aerospace and norad and general john kelly, u.s. southern command. we also welcome james stavridis. we thank you for your leadership and please pass along our gratitude to the men and women who serve in your commands for their dedication and sacrifices, as well as for the sacrifices of their families whose support is so essential to the success of our military and our nation. since last year's eucom posture, it was likely her last appearance and i am glad that i included the word likely. so now we can thank you. thank you again for your four years as the supreme allied commander, which makes you one of the longest serving commanders in u.s. history.

you have been a steady hand during some very turbulent times and we wish you the best in retirement for military service. the witnesses before us represent the united states commitment to defend the homeland to help our neighbors and to come to the collective defense of our close allies in europe. the ability to meet these commitments has been put at risk by the arbitrary budget cuts called sequestration. resulting from the budget impasse here in washington. this committee is interested in hearing from each of you on how the continuing resolution and sequestration are affecting military operations and readiness in your areas of responsibility in what would be the effect of sequestration continued. secretary chuck hagel announced changes to the missile defense posture, including plans to deploy an additional 14

ground-based interceptors in alaska in order to stay ahead of the evolving north korean missile threat. two previous intercept flight tests using the latest model of the atmosphere resulted in failures. secretary chuck hagel made clear that we would not deploy the missiles until we have confidence that they will work as intended. the missile defense is taking steps to ensure that this will work reliably and effectively before we produce or deployed more. they have already conducted a successful test in january and an intercept test is planned for late this year. we are also planning an earlier center intercepted this summer.

we want to demonstrate that the system works as intended. it is important that we have confidence in the system. that we try before we buy. we also have a plan to increase our defenses of the united states against iranian long-range missiles with warheads are scepters deployed in the united states rather than in europe. secretary chuck hagel also emphasized that the u.s. commitment with a nato missile defense remains ironclad. he said the missile deployments deployments is making in phases one and two and three of the european phased adaptive approach, including poland and romania will be able to provide

coverage of all is planned by 2018. we would be interested to hear from general jacoby and admiral stavridis about this posture. our transatlantic interest remain. a lawyer is mutual commitment more fully demonstrated than in the nato-led international security assistance force in afghanistan. countries from the yukon region contribute 90% of the non-us forces in our international coalition. despite some public weariness and problems created for the troops and our continued presence by the redhead rhetoric of president karzai, the coalition has demonstrated its

cohesion by adapting them together and out together approach through the 2014 and date for the combat mission in afghanistan. the reason nato defense, they have reconsidered an earlier proposal to reduce the size of the afghan forces by one third after 2014. that included the good news that the agreed-upon change course and maintain the afghan security forces at their current level of 352,000 release 2018. this will send an important message of reassurance to the afghans as we draw down u.s. and coalition forces. several defense ministers also expressed a willingness to participate in a possible post-

2014 nato training mission in afghanistan. another issue discussed was the appropriate role of nato with regard to syria. it is being felt by key allies in the region, including israel and turkey. as the civil war continues to rage on, president bashar al-assad and his associates are resorting increasingly with other indiscriminate capabilities that terrorize innocent syrians and increase further the flow of refugees out of syria. former secretary panetta discussed the possibility of more robust options for military support last year. and he agreed to bring this matter to his counterparts in

brussels. the recent decisions by the french and the british that provided assistance directly to the syrian opposition suggests that the position and nato is by no means unified. admiral come i hope you will provide us with some concept of our current thinking compared to that of our european partnerships, as it relates to syria and possible additional roles for the alliance beyond the deployment. eucom responsibilities include managing military engagement and cooperation, including through the nato and russia council. this includes russia's cooperation with the coalition equipment out of afghanistan, along the northern distribution network through russia and over 110 military to military activities between our two militaries last year. i hope that you will provide us

with reviews of the values of and further engagement with russia. northern command, which was established after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is responsible for the defense of the homeland and providing defense support to civil authorities in response to domestic, natural, or man-made disasters, including those that could result from cyberevents or attacks. we would be interested in hearing how norcom and norad will contribute to the emerging domain of cybersecurity in the homeland, and how they will work together in response to cyberthreats. my additional comments on norcom and socom, will be made. we thank you for your tenants and we now turn it over to

senator inhofe. >> thank you, thank you general kelly, general jacoby. i appreciate the time you have given us. avenel, this will be her final time to share with us. you have had so many great experiences. or than ever before, the threats are interconnected of what happens in europe and asia pacific and africa and has the potential to impact our security here at home that we have talked about. as is true with regards to north korea, the new leadership has escalated tensions in that region. nuclear test, statements, the development of a missile delivery system. a major concern has been iran.

our intelligence is something that we cannot ignore. reducing number of ground-based interceptors by 14, i am glad that it is going back up. however, that does not resolve the problem. we have talked about this several times, the threat is very will. each thing needs to be corrected. it needs to be addressed. violence continues to escalate throughout south america and in mexico as a result of increasing the transnational criminal organization.

it now extends through west africa in europe and even last year in the united states. combating it requires government solutions. there's not a better time in my life when things have been as dangerous as it is today in the threats more diverse. due to the planned budget cuts, we are posed to cut our defense budget by $8 trillion in the next 10 years. we're talking about what has are to come out of the budget. another half killing would come through sequestration. it is interesting that that is the only area where this administration has been actively cutting government. it addresses the need for a national military strategy to reflect the global security environment. the military, and the growing

budget, currently the current strategy as well. starting with the strategic guidance issued in january 2012. it seems that we are falling into a trap of creating strategies entirely on how quickly we can cut defense budgets rather than as a result give an honest assessment. i am very much concerned. i always thought that the major mission of the federal government is to protect the homeland. we have to get back to that mentality and recognize the threat and you guys are in the right position to do that. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator. admiral? >> chairman, ranking member, members of the committee. thank you very much for taking time to hear from myself,

general jacoby and general kelly. i always say that i feel safe when i'm with a big marine general and a big army general. it is probably the safest and i could be up your wet. thank you for having us and putting us together for this panel. as the chairman mentioned, rounding out for years in my current position. before that i was lucky enough to be down at norcom in general kelly leiby commission. i have enjoyed being able to express where commands are doing. i think that as i look at the challenges for the u.s. and european command, where i am focused at the moment is first and foremost work in and around europe, a number of things tensioned by the chairman, nato

system, which is part of this, i am focused on afghanistan, which is a key operational mission and i will be glad to talk about that in some debt. we are monitoring the situation extremely closely. it is close to europe and part of the u.s. european command's responsibility, which includes military to military relationships with israel. so we watch that area very closely. we don't talk as much about areas like the balkans, all of those things, they remain extremely important as well. there are a wide variety of other issues from special operations to humanitarian disasters, countering terrorism, organized crime, it is a very rigid agenda. if i had one overarching

question, why europe? what is important about this part of the mission for the department of defense? i would say very quickly that it is the values that we share with this pool of partners in europe. to stand with us on freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom of the press. secondly, it is the economics and the bonds that bind us together. the united states represent about one fourth of the world's gross domestic product. the nations of europe represent more. nato is about 50% of the gdp. it is $4 trillion per year across the atlantic. so i think the transatlantic connection has an important economic component as well. third, geography does matter. sometimes people say to me, they

are the bastions of the cold war. i would counter by saying that it's not. they are forward operating bases in the 21st century. they allow us to extend support from eucom in that area as well. fourth, i would say that nato would serve together around the world is a wide variety of missions that we can talk about this morning. fifth and finally, nowhere else in the world will we find such an elite and capable group of allies who have the technology, the training, the levels to help us. we need to encourage our european partners to spend more on defense. i do that consistently, i'm glad to talk about that today. but i do believe these connections are important for us and will be so going forward into the future.

members of the committee, i will conclude by saying again, thank you on behalf of the men and women of u.s. european command. thank you for the support of this committee. i will pass your thanks onto them as well. i look forward to answering your question this morning. >> thank you very much. from admiral stavridis to general jacoby. >> thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. it is a pleasure to be here with my friends and fellow combatants i am not as big of an army guy as john is. but we are here to protect. i appreciate this committee and the continued support of our important missions. includes homeland defense, and that is our number one priority mission. it is a mission which we work closely with canada in our fully integrated national command of

norad. next, we remain active in conducting our core mission of defense the support of civil authority. for which the highlight lasser was her participation in the interagency response to hurricane sandy. alongside defense activities with our allies, we continue to conduct security cooperation efforts with our close partners in mexico and the bahamas. our norad missions include the phrase that we have the rocks. we approach our duties and commitment to the american and canadian people. the execute the norad mission through our well honed and uncompromising 24/7 defense of the operation. our citizens have a higher expectation of our ability to defend and support here in the homeland, and rightfully so.

in the event of national or man-made disaster, we meet those expectations by leveraging the capability of the department of defense to support a agency like fema. hurricane sandy offered us a glimpse of what a complex catastrophe which spans several states and regions could look like. and we will continue to have this, provided in the 2012 reports of that we can act swiftly with our efforts when the unthinkable happens and we are called. we are facing an increasingly complex and dynamic security environment. for us to adapt and evolve, technologies advance and proliferate, creating vulnerability in the homeland than ever before and complicating the accomplishment of our mission. from cyberand ballistic missile defense to the disruption and defeat of transnational criminal organizations. as such, a critical command

priority is to advocate and develop capabilities in our core mission in order to outpace these threats. while we are confronted with this emerging threat landscape, the current fiscal environment adds uncertainty to the availability and development of the capabilities that we will need to manage the risks these threats will pose. readiness concerns are sure to grow is clearly described by recent service chief testimony. the most pressing of those will include on forecasted cuts for training and exercise programs, which are fundamental to building partnerships essential to responding to events in the homeland. unexpected loss of service capabilities and readiness could also erode our ability to conduct our critical homeland defense mission. as we look forward, despite the challenges, the current partnerships and history of training education and exercise programs for now please norad to defend the nation against the full spectrum of threats. but we will have to work hard

with the services to sustain a posture as we deal with programs and budget uncertainties. today and in the future we will remain to be commended for the united states and canada on the vision with our trusted partners that will defend north america, and support them in their times of greatest need. we will need this committee's continued support to meet that vision. and given the opportunity to appear today and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you so much, general jacoby. general kelly? >> mr. chairman, senator inhofe, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today. on behalf of not only those personnel in afghanistan, but those in southern american. i'm here to talk about the socom. first, transnational organized crime.

consist of the responsibilities responsibilities that i haven't security cooperation activities as well. the support law enforcement includes highly effective and efficient and cost-effective detention in monitoring operations, sharing information and having the countries combat drug trafficking and dismantling very troubling criminal networks. we also focus on building relationships with regional militaries to enhance defense of the united states and the security of the region. human rights play a big role with everything we do. for my engagement with regional leaders who are working alongside our nation's forces, and the defense college here in washington. militaries in the region have made enormous strides in terms of professionalization and

respect for civilian authorities and human rights. thanks to a large measure to the role of the u.s. military over the years and our continued engagement. we continue to have a wide range of possible crises in the region, including national disasters and evacuation of u.s. citizens. finally, our most critical mission today includes operations at guantánamo bay. i am concerned at this point in time that the facility and infrastructure down there it's built to last two or three or four years and has now been rapidly deteriorating. we have some initiatives that in terms of infrastructure need to be taken seriously this year. mr. chairman, members, i look forward to discussing these conditions.

>> thank you, general kelly. let's try an eight minute first-round. general jacoby, let me start with you. last week, secretary chuck hagel announced plans to deploy an additional number of ground-based receptors in alaska. he also indicated that we would not deploy these interceptors unless we had confidence from flight testing that they are going to work as intended. do you support the plan that the secretary has announced last week? >> senator, yes, i do. >> do you agree that before we deploy these interceptors, that it is essential to demonstrate the correction in an operationally realistic flight test so that we can have some confidence that will work it will work as intended? >> senator, yes, i do.

>> general jacoby. last friday, secretary hagel and admiral would've felt sad that the currently deployed system against long-range missile threats from either north korea or iran is in place. you agree that the current system protects all of the united states against those long-range missile threats from north korea and iran, including the east coast as of now? >> yes, sir. we have coverage with the current system. >> for the entire united states? >> that is correct. >> putting east coast at the moment? >> that is correct. i ask you about the idea of the east coast missile defense site.

he said at that time that we did not have a requirement for such a site. no plans to deploy one. since then, in our defense authorization bill, we have an environmental assessment of various sites on the east coast. of course, there has been a modification of the adaptive plan so that it is now europe that is covered by that plan. is it possible in the future that we will be able to defend all of the united states from an iranian long-range missile threat without leaving an east coast missile defense site? >> senator, as i testified last year, the condition is still the same. we currently can defend it the entire united states from an iranian long-range missile threat. the question is how do we stay ahead of the evolving threat and

how we keep our options open for the continued evolution of north korean threat. the threat of ballistic missiles is not going down. >> sir, we do not know yet whether it will be possible in the future to have that kind of defense against an iranian threat without an east coast site. >> my testimony is that as the iranian threat of all, we need to be prepared to continue improving the resilience, the redundancy, and they agility for which i am providing to the entire united states. that could include additional missile sites as well. >> it could, but we do not yet know. is that correct? we just simply want to keep that option open. but as of right now, we have protection for the entire united states. we may or may not be able to have that protection, depending upon the involvement without an east coast site. >> that is correct.

>> phases of this approach are going to protect all of nato by 2018. phase one was deployed at the end of 2011. phase two was deployed in 2015, including the so-called site in romania, and phase three is planned to be deployed in 2008. will this plan and capability provide better coverage of europe than the previous plan? >> general? >> senator, i believe that we are making steady improvements in the plan. >> this plan, as far as you you're concerned, is going to

protect all of nato against the iranian missile threats by 2018? >> i would defer to uconn. >> okay, i intended this to good admiral stavridis. >> that is fine. >> i am sorry, admiral. is this phase approach that is now the approach that has been adopted, is it a solid approach, do you support it? >> yes, sir. >> is that at least as good of an approach as the previous one? perhaps better? >> i think of who fills the capability and the requirements. >> would you say it is at least as good? >> so far, so good. i will know more when i get back to europe and have a chance to talk to them later this week. >> at all, let me ask you about afghanistan. by the afghan security forces on track to assume this throughout

afghanistan later this spring? >> yes, sir, they are. they currently have 87% of the population under this and that will go to 100% this year. >> you support the president's decision to drawdown these troops at february of 2014? >> and we said today, i do believe that that looks like a good support. >> will nato negotiate these forces agreement with afghanistan applicable to any nato forces participating in a post-2014 mission in the same way that we are negotiating the status agreement to protect u.s. forces deployed to afghanistan after 2014? >> yes, sir, that is the intent.

>> it is a parallel negotiation? >> is going to be sequential. we are going to have the usb essay and then we will move forward after that. >> admiral, relative to syria, you outlined the impact of the civil war in syria on certain parts of this. can you give us some of the thinking as to whether or not the alliance should increase its involvement in syria through direct support of the opposition, possibly the creation of buffer zones and possibly the discretion of serious our defenses were part of serious air defenses? >> as we all know, the syrian situation continues to become worse and worse.

70,000 people killed, refugees pushed out of the country. no end in sight to a vicious civil war. the alliance has taken a position that it will follow the same sequence that was used in libya, which is to say prior to nato involvement, there would have to be a u.n. security council resolution regional agreement and an agreement among the 28 patients. so within nato, what we are focused on is defending now with syria. and we would move patriot missiles down to do that. in terms of what else is happening in an individual nation by nation basis, there is a great deal of discussion of everything you mentioned, no-fly zones, arms embargoes, etc. it is moving individually, but

it has not yet come into nato as an overall nato type of approach. it is focused, planning, being prepared. but the movement at the moment is in the individual national way. >> does that include some countries that are thinking about the possibility of going after at least some of serious air defense? >> yes. >> thank you. >> senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i want to get some clarification. i am disturbed about the answers that you just gave. i know that general jacoby, that would've been better asked. however, you are responsible for the homeland. when we talk about the capability of iran, we talk about both western europe and the eastern united states.

if you are saying that the ground-based interceptor in poland, along with a radar and the czech republic, i think we all agreed at the time that that was primarily for that protection. the eastern united states. we all agree that we are glad that we went back. but that is still primarily -- and i am comfortable from anything coming from that direction. now, when you say that you are comfortable, and i'm talking to you, admiral, with what we have in the place of what was taken down to accomplish that. is that depending on this in any way? to as i see the landscape, from

phases one and two and three, i think that it will paste the iranian threat to that. it would include this is what would provide coverage for your. >> okay, europe and eastern united states. >> i have deferred a check on that. but 12 and three is strictly dashed. >> but how do you assess the threat to the eastern united states with her capabilities right now? >> we have a plan that is based on limited defense of the entire united states. given the threat that represents iran to the eastern united states today, we can cover that threat. the question is making sure that we paste that threat as it evolves. >> atmel, you say yes, you need

this. yet, our intelligence, as you heard me say, it would give us a system in iran would have a weapon and delivery system by 2015. we had general keller in here. he said when i asked him that question, he said that i am confident that we can defend against a limited attack from iran, although we are not in the most optimum position and posture to do that today. do you agree with me? >> i think that today what we have is the phase one system. which is the radar in turkey. and i would agree with him that we are not optimally positioned. the faster we can bring on the additional phases, the better. >> would've me be better off if

we had stayed with a system that would give us that capability by 2015? which is what they were anticipating at that time? >> nonetheless, i don't want to put you in that position. >> admiral stavridis, how will the budget cuts impact the missile defense program? i want to ask a question. you partially answered it. almost all of the details include the budget that came out four years ago when we did away with the system. by the way, we did away with the ground-based interceptor in

poland and the radar in the czech republic. we had told him that we are going to do that, and i always will remember. we are taking a lot of risk here, we are upsetting russia, we want to make sure that you don't pull out the rug from under us if you don't agree to that. and i said absolutely. of course, that is what did happen ultimately. okay. let me think here. the situation that we have right now is dependent upon the command that has all the assets they are. in my office in talking about the southern command, you talk about the amount of drugs that are taking place right now and

appropriation of drugs. i remember when you had that command, admiral, you said the same thing. i would like to have you share with us with this panel. the seriousness of how the drug cartel works. no one is paying that much attention to it now. but is that producing a lot of assets that are going into western and southern and northern africa? right now, they are getting the money from someplace. i think that you understand that is one of the major areas in mali and other areas. >> yes, sir, there are two aspects. let's talk okaying primarily here. he comes into the united states in large amounts and has very adverse effects on our country. a great deal of cocaine is produced. all of that comes primarily from

columbia. i must give them a shout out. they have done a tremendous job working with us. we have jim and his appreciation for the united states government and its people have done over the years. to defend against those that they don't like. they have fallen to number three producers of cocaine in the world. the vast majority, in fact, i would say 100% of that goes into brazil. brazil is now the number two consumer of cocaine. and also its traffic goes further to year. brazil is the number two consumer when the cocaine gets to the west coast of africa. africa is not a particularly big consumer of cocaine. but it is a trafficking route to

the north, which is a very big consumer of cocaine. everyone, all the bad guys along the way take a little bit of a cut. an awful lot of what is going on , there is a fair amount of. >> a lot of it is coming from there and being channel up from there. a lot of that is appearing on the scene. >> exactly. >> this morning i was on a talk show with a rather liberal host. we had this modest disagreement. hopefully it will be cleared up by information on the record. the response was he didn't use

of the term. what he is talking about is relevant. are the three of you as confident that this has a value that it did back in the day of the cold war? >> i think i ran is a very difficult mission to assess. so i think it would be less certain as a proposition. >> okay. >> senator? >> i think there is a very different strategic contact and we have to be wide-eyed with how we approach iran. as the commander responsible for the defense of the homeland, we are going to focus on this. i think it is appropriate. >> okay. >> thank you. thank you, senator inhofe. >> thank you, gentlemen for your

service. i would like to thank him for his extraordinary services in many different capacities. as you leave your command, thank you, sir. let me just begin with part of our long-term strategy with respect to afghanistan. continued support for the afghan security forces. given the economic crises in europe today, what is your perspective about the long-term commitment to having these international efforts? >> i think the europeans will stay with us in afghanistan. historically, they have provided one soldier for every two hours. about 33 or 35%.

there is about 35,000 europeans are. i think if the u.s. has 10,000 troops, the europeans could come in with 5000 or 6000 troops. my sense is that they want to be with us in this mission. they believe in it. like us, they are cautiously optimistic that despite all of the challenges, if we stay steady post 2014, we have a good mission they are that this can succeed. >> thank you very much. i'm going to ask all of the gentlemen the same question. we had general alexander here recently. he talked about the new dimension of warfare. from this perspective, what do you think the biggest challenges

are? >> cyberis the area where we have the biggest myths content mismatch between our level of preparation, which is relatively low and the threat is relatively high. terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, specific enemies around the world. we spend a lot of time repairing for those. i don't think we have done that level of preparation yet. even you know that better than most from your conversations here with general alexander. but the good news is from a european perspective, here is a pool of partners who are advanced in this area. the british and french and the germans are quite capable. as a whole, nato has created a center for cybersecurity in a nation that suffered a cyberattack. i think as we move forward with this, the ideas of partnership

and linkages in nato and europe are going to be a positive aspect. i'm working i am working with the general on that. >> thank you. >> my principal role will be responding to the cyberevent, just as i do with civil authorities. it is very difficult as a challenge for us. it is more like an earthquake than it is a hurricane. it will be in network speed, probably unannounced. we will have effects rapidly. we are working with fema along with our cybercommand in what could be part of these systems and infrastructure. defending the homeland, there were important steps made with executive order that helps us better define our role is. there is a lot of work to be done on that. it is complicated, and we are

going to have to continue exercising and training against that threat. >> your preliminary estimate -- that is set for a reasonable threat that exists today? the country could be staggering in terms of this? >> i think that we had a glimpse and cascading effects that you can have. he saw the amount of power outages and the ripple effect that it had across not just people, but the economy, that was a glimpse of the kinds of effects that you could create with a cyberattack. that is why it has our attention. >> that is why individual industries, and given the potential, had preemptive action today. >> senator, i think that this set some standards and goals.

we have identified the correct relationships between commercial and private and government. .. i presume that you are seeing

huge pressures as naval forces are withdrawn because of budget pressures, but also can you comment on the role of coast guard because even though it's not the jurisdiction i present a place of very large role, too. if the idb to push its in your al because that will degrade. >> i think i plan to grow on their life in that part of the world. we are ensuring that they hip and shoulder to shoulder. as you say with a secret regime, i occupy a seat that is before suitable combatant commanders. we didn't get much that we get just about zero now if sequestration stands. what that translates to his last year we get 150 to 200 tons of cocaine on the high seas, coast

guard and u.s. navy shoulder to shoulder. next year will make its way ashore into the united states. sequestration in particular didn't have much before. >> let me tell you, not much has changed. 1969 as with the fourth in 10th and injury and the economy forces quite obviously that. at least that's consistent. one area that has been mentioned before is the foreign policy if not the military role of your brand in china in areas like socom. have you noticed that unity, not military, diplomatic, economic activity that both these countries quick >> the short answer is absolutely. to put a little meat on a bone, one of the things i'm supposed

to be doing is making sure the united states rants apart archers of latin america. the partnership is a too late thing i you'd agree that it's very one-way now and they very much want the united states in their lives the exception of the two or three or four of them very much want the united states and allies. so we have great trading relationships, great military to military contact, but when you have an organization like the chinese come in the economically powerful, spending money, whether they're increasing infrastructure that pours, panama canal are buying everything that they want and large, large quantities. the partnership with china is very strong. they do the best they can to establish milk to build partnerships and they do pretty well on that. so that's china. on the arabian side, we've seen

a significant increase in their desire to establish relationships, obviously venezuela to date has been the central core of that. over the last several years they've done pretty well in other locations. regardless what happens, and they don't need that support anywhere. they've got some relationships. who knows where they're going. it's not a huge threat now, but anywhere they go, particularly region that is completely different and they are culturally, religiously and all the rest, they bear watching. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> senator mccain. >> i want to thank the witnesses for being here interested and dedicated work, especially you, admiral. this is probably your last appearance before this committee

can be thank you for years about standing of dedicated service to the country. i think to ask each of you assisting me as possible if you could tell us the specific impact that it's happening i will have on morale and readiness, including retention of sequestration within your areas of responsibility, and maybe begin with you, admiral. >> yes, sir. it is obviously significant and negative in all elements dimension. i want to begin by saying a particular area i am concerned about an morale and retention is in our civilian workforce, where we have these marvelous civilians who do extraordinary work stand with this every single day and yet they are facing the possibility of furloughs, 20% pay cuts and so forth. my own headquarters is reduced by about 25% in terms of efficiency and ability to support missions. our actual operations in the

balkans, and the labonte, reconnaissance or a reduced at about that level. i'm canceling about 140 security assistance programs that help us build this base is. i was talking to senator reid in afghanistan and in teeth, even on the family site, the impact on children who will be facing schoolday cut in furtherance of teachers is significant in this part of this whole challenge for us. as we look forward at the cuts and for structuring platforms coming, overall it's a very difficult and challenging picture, syria. >> senator, many of the same comments with a command with the most civilian personnel scientific command work across all of my missions is to defend the homeland and support civil

authorities and work with their partners in the region. this is having a significant act on them and their families as they look forward to simulant 13 t. and what's their take on benefit here. i would also say from a soldier's point of view on this, senator, you know we have a generation and force out there that knows what it looks like it may know what not rate they don't have the tools they need to train and maintain readiness. to 13 the services are challenged to meet readiness requirements and 14 is unknown at this point. i do not have a lot of the same forces to defend the homeland. i cannot trained, ready and available for system services. degradation in service capabilities provide me from the f-16 that the mobile training teams from the basis of partnership at their mexican partners. all of those things are under stress right now and are part of

the sequestration in the force. >> immediate impact on socom is our countercharge interdiction and potential monitor operations >> you just said you will not be able to interdict the drugs next year at issue are able to issue. >> exactly ray. on the engagement piece i've had to cancel probably 50% of my engagement. these are training exercises that night and i've 12 or 15 soldiers, salmon, airmen, marines. there is a sense however as we go down this road and certainly i can talk to the american countries. there's a sense they have that we are withdrawing. partnership is important, but it's a two-way street. i don't think they believe that, which changes a large part of

the equation and on the morale issue, jim transferred to the better civilians. our civilians are great folks. >> what about the desire of the uniformed military and the good ones to say and? i noticed all three -- >> at that time in the ranks. i was a former enlisted during. admittedly the a lot of these things to research insights and i'm proud of that. they are wondering what the heck is going on. less than six or eight months ago they were thank you for your service and you guys are the greatest time of gold star families are confused because its now dollars and cents in a system to we begun to turn our backs on them. >> i think from what the witness said the we are doing them a great disservice. for the record, which you speak

clicks yes, sir. >> i concur, senator. >> admiral stavridis, i asked if the north atlantic council had directed nato to do any contingency planning, whatever for nato involvement in syria. is nato doing any military planning now for serious contingencies? >> 's error, we are. we're looking at a wide range of operations that we are prepared if called upon to be engaged as we were in libya. >> as you know, nato has to play batteries to southern turkey, daily to defend turkey against contingencies in syria. this feature of missiles capable of shooting down aircraft clinics are they capable of shooting down scott missiles? at the effective and a 20-mile range? >> yes, sir.

why can they be positioning awake to shoot down some of assad's aircraft? >> yes, sir. >> which you agree it you agree it would serve as a powerful disincentive for pilots to fly in that area? >> i think whenever aircraft are shut down as a powerful distance. >> is it your opinion, world, that it is time we hope this theory in opposition in ways that would break what is a prolonged civil war? >> that option should be and is actively explored by the nations looking at this. >> could i ask you personal opinion? >> you can. my personal opinion is that would be helpful in breaking down the deadlock in the assad regime. >> thank you. general kelley and general jacoby, we are acacia comprehensive immigration reform

and obviously coming from a southwestern state, the sheer border security security is very important in the focus is on immigration of illegal people crossing our border illegally. both of you pointed out that a primary reason for a border security is the flow of drugs. isn't it true -- general company told me to maturity of drugs -- cocaine that comes across our southern border -- maybe you could talk a little bit about the challenges we face in securing the nation from the flow of drugs as well as that of people who come to this country illegally. >> all serb attack on senator. the northern command support civil authority on the southwest border, principally

law-enforcement agencies in teachers through customs border patrol. we do that by fulfilling requests for support and provide some unique military capabilities to do that. it's our mutual benefit to do that. it is my opinion that porter should be the best part of the relationship train to countries family of the tremendous trading relationship across the border. there's a tension between security and economic piece of this. i think as well as well as we do in security, will always be in a position of needing to improve it because we are dealing with a dab they've come a reckless criminal organization. so in the end may experience has been were going to have to take on the network on both sides of the border and in all the areas of responsibility to have an

effect on security. >> you would increase technology is really the answer. people are important, but the licensing technology in iraq and afghanistan on a drones and centers are key elements. is it your view -- do you agree? >> i agree all of our partnership deleveraging every technical capability we can and we seem to be effective across borders revert. >> on a technology issue -- >> just drugs first. >> trunks, we have in the so-called transit zone the drugs come up from south america summit talking here and very, very large multiple ton packages. once he gets his shorter and honduras and starts to flow through guatemala -- by the way,

these are great partners. do you really with us in this fight to the tune of many, many thousands of deaths a year. once it gets a short guatemala, honduras, get into next coaches outside may sound sound a tremendous partner, essentially undersea distribution system that is at least as effect to this federal express. it is moved from a broken into packages and moves its way across the southern border. as i mentioned yesterday, virtually all the hairline that comes in the united states is produced in mexico and makes its way across the border and that applies to methamphetamines as well, almost all producers said the country to make its way across the border. my predecessor put this together. rather than on u.s. navy ships just me entering their way across the ocean, looking for

people, they've got it down to such a science, basically using isr electronic intercepts, highly technical means. they can tell u.s. navy ship in week until a u.s. navy ship to the research location on the ocean, look up the starboard bow and see that guy going for a nonstop a scout got four and a half tons. uneconomic so is give the name of the driver. the technology pieces huge. it resulted in 150, 200 tons we know of cocaine taken off the market. >> could i just say the flow of cocaine is not appreciably decreased. is that correct? >> there is plenty of cocaine, so we could allow. a shot at again to columbia again to get a lot on their behalf.

honduras, guatemala, el salvador. but you do is up work, but there's enough getting through. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. just to follow that question, general kelley. what more can and should the united states do in your command and potentially others? >> if you're speaking about drugs, just more assets. as i say, were very, very good at locating. we understand the network very, very well. also as if airplanes come any airplanes once we identify them because mantell surface ships should pick up. a key point if i could.

if we get drivers of the boats, we can very quickly turn that because they enter our legal justice system. honduras, guatemala, places like that are extremely helpful to us. if we get the drivers of the boats are pilots of the airplanes, we don't get the same turnaround and intelligence because of the nature of the network. bear with us. more assets equal more tonnage, less assets equal a less tonnage. >> let me pursue the illegal drug trafficking question but that question about human trafficking, that is the flow of people at an effect who are excluded either with bad working conditions, substandard working conditions they are or in this country exploitation and so forth. to what extent is that any

concerned and what measures can be taken against it? i lascaux iiib that question if i may. >> we watch an awful lot of flow that come in from the middle east, coming to the traffic pattern in latin america and they disappear into the united states. is it not is highly efficient. anything that gets on the network you can pay for disk at a pretty good chance of getting through. so i look at high-value, high interest people. you don't pay a lot of money to come from pakistan, flighted latin america and get into the united states. we are not talking about people who are economic refugees, within other business if you will. i think chuck jacoby has an answer on the other part of this. >> senator, but they all deal

with activity has in common with his people, drugs, money, weapons, this complex criminal network has grown in size and capacity and ruthlessness and the agility to find the vulnerabilities across her back frontier. within nations that are good partners that this could essential in south america, europe and mexico are exploiting the constitution searches vulnerabilities that exist. in my view after looking at this, john and i talk about it a lot. more steps to disrupt and defeat the network is i believe the high payoff activities in terms of illicit committee at its people,, money or weapons. a very powerful organization that hasn't been taken on the way it should. >> two quick points on that.

one is in addition to everything chuck grilled on sundays that works, we need to remember the truly dark edge of the spec and his weapons of mass destruction. these routes, the ability to live 10 times of cocaine, if you can attend tennessee company created nuclear device and move it into the homeland. that's what i'm worried about is the south, commander and it's also pertinent today when you look at proliferation. second point to the true question we we talked a lot about cocaine. comes from poppy, which is produced in afghanistan. there's another narcotic flow that comes up for the balkans across europe and into the united states that is worth considering as we discuss this trafficking point and i

completely agree with my fellow combat commanders said these trafficking routes are crucial elements apply for centuries. they don't get enough attention. >> the fact that an awful good thing to the pattern in united states we have to acknowledge the fact we have hundreds and even thousands of very dedicated law enforcement or chanel. we'll have driven our headquarters. dea, fbi commute dha, treasury, order patrol agents. these people are hugely dedicated people fighting this fight her to shoulder with us. we have to acknowledge the fact they are not in uniform but these don't wear military uniforms. they do it very, very tough job, but they're overwhelmed us to points out the intricacies and efficiency of this networking, ruthlessness of it.

we need to remember the true heroes in every sense of the word. >> these are not only ruthless, all server that lets because the amounts of money are so huge and i agree with you that are civilian non-person in authority, which had a prior point in our history would've been relying on completely to combat networks now has been out and an outmanned in our research research by this criminal networks, so we've relied increasingly on the network you and the men and women into your command have done. i wonder whether you feel either more resources to them for more coordination with you is perhaps an answer to dealing with these networks. >> if i understand the question, i'm a believer in the away game.

i go back to the efficiency of what we do in southern command with the united states coast guard mlb partners we have a press to u.s. government, not to mention our partners. so when i talk in terms of what we do in the south, i talk to multiple tons at a time. 10 to 20 in that range. once it gets into this land would trafficking network, the efficiency is unbelievable. these large amounts are broken into small amount of an smuggled across the border in thousands of trunks, for voice, containers, in my opinion the basic editors before it ever goes to short. >> you sure that, general jacoby? >> yes, i do. the border itself is not the optimum place to stop this.

it's as follows, tamils, all chileans, going around the coast , so the industrial that can be done, lurches and not a mobile networks that we need to treat as threat networks that threaten our security and we need to come up with a policy and partnerships to put pressure on the network. the financiers, leaders, logistics, operators, the folks we learned how to go after in our threat not work we've done in the past. >> i just had one thing they've done speaking of the away game in the u.s. european command has put together a joint interagency counter trafficking center modeled to the one in key west, very low-cost whole of government, bringing the partners and trying finding good

at these routes. it sold government agency approach we will succeed. >> i want to thank you all for your testimony and extra hours service to our nation and i think general kelly from your testimony about morale and the need to make sure we maintain what attracts the best and brightest and bravest were military is on point at this time in our history. thank you for your service in testimony today. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. senator jim was. >> thank you, mr. chairman. to reach of the thank you for your service, leadership and all the men and women who serve under you, please convey heartfelt tanks for their great commitment to freedom. admiral, i'll echo what the chairman said to start with. we're going to miss you. even such a great asset to her

country and also a good friend. we surrogacy you go, but we're thankful for your service. various press reports today that there may have been the use of chemical weapons in syria. the allegations being thrown from both sides, the rebels citing government side. any information you can tell us about that with respect to the use of chemical and from the aleppo area where it's alleged? >> stair, i think it is take that for the record and prevent that a classified level. >> with regard to benghazi, at merle, i know you're put on high alert turn the course of the attack that took place at the mission in the annex. there were lots of failures that looks like from an intel standpoint as well as issues of

leadership of what should have been done. can you give us your the back now from the day you had done that you are being told and give us a lesson learned to benghazi. >> stair, my job from u.s. european command was to serve as a back office for carter ham. i know carter has been up and testified in a understand he's going to provide a detailed classified for the record kind of tick tack of how it's unfolded. what i saw was immediately after the attack we started shopping i said to general ham started with isr to the predator coverage overhead. we began moving patch on her hands request to in extremis for in extremis for switchers taking control of that, moved it from

croatia to stick in a letter. he note to fast teams come memory and response teams from red hat to and create. despite emperor c-130s nc-17 is. we try to just post for says south and forward to general ham. to get the greatest lessons learned tougaloo to the intelligence piece which is the critical thing because we have to defend hundreds of critical locations around the world. we need to ensure that the intelligence breaks we are reacting as quickly as we can. time and distance are a tyranny of their own. the bottom line for this particular incident from a eucom it is the value of having bases in europe civic and the forces

forward and within the european area we can move them from the north to south and get as close to the action is possible to support the combatant commander who's in charge, in this case carter ham. that's a quick overview, sir. i can provide more in the record as well. >> last that she did on both of those questions. general kelley, during the socom budget hearings for 2013, general fraser commented on the capability of the platform region six s. would be utilized to have it drug trafficking in detection and monitoring of wide-area surveillance. caught with a 116 from providence place two joints are his missions per month is the port of europe ration himself calm. can you enlighten us as to the

use of joint stars and what future plans you have to leverage this asset as well as other isr platforms in your region? >> it's very important what we do in the counter drug of her. are going to lose support because his sequestration so that's essentially a tivo, but a hugely affect a wide area as we begin the process of identifying the drug traffickers has become on of the northern tier of colombia and venezuela. if we lose that, makes that harder. but that's the reality. much of the isi are is an example. we have bombers that train anyways u.s. air force fullback or the to the caribbean area.

to get training in flight time and help us out. a lot of that was it ever fell off the table or i or general fraser. ready to breakout of the services. i will make it more difficult to identify the patterns in the not-too-distant future. >> well, i hope it may be flexibility that are given all of your command in the cia could hopefully get completed in the next couple of days, maybe figure out a way to utilize some of the platforms. general kelley again with the demise of hugh kershaw does, what can you tell us about the future leadership and venezuela plus relationships with the united states. is it going to approve, denigrate, which way is it going to go?

>> essentially the rising star are from the same point of come view, stable crowd, the expectation is the vice president win the election in april. i think senator knows is, the economy, all of that is on the edge to either a pilot country. the vice president when he wins the election was likely to win is going to inherit all of the problems that already existed there and they're pretty critical. the one difference is he does not have the charisma that chavez had with 51% of the country. he's got his hands full, but we don't and dissipate and it's really a state department question. we don't anticipate any real change between our country and the venezuelan government at least in the short-term.

>> admiral stavridis, i was not a proponent of the s.t.a.r.t. treaty, primarily because it did not address tactical nuclear weapons. the russians we now have continued to have not increased their arsenal, certainly modernized inventory of tactical weapons. what information can you give us relative to the continued reduction of nuclear weapons or the issue relative to technical versus strategic by the rush of this? >> stair, and classified level you are correct russians have basic ticket inventory of tactical nuclear weapons. they are maintained, upgraded as part of their planning and theory. are they to come back with declassified answer they would give you more detail.

it is a concern i watch it closely for many a day. >> you can follow up on that. >> i will commissary. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all of you for your service, at all. general kelley, thank you. if you're passed out on two men in women in harms way because they don't always hear, but they sure are the ones who protect her freedom. general kelley come you talked about the criminal networks added his third law enforcement combined with criminal networks. other nations working with networks on the other side were partners with them in a number of these efforts and what can be done in regards to that? whoever wants to take the first crack at that.

>> with the exception of possibilities in socom, i'm confident there's no government. there's no government supported but officials are supported, and many for their own personal corruption purposes. a few of them to make life more difficult wouldn't want to get into detail. >> i think john is absolutely correct in this points to another real concerned about these networks. it's not just the impact on our populations coming youth using narcotics.

the profits are used to corrupt officials have not undermined his fragile democracies. i'd be hard-pressed in a mystique that was identified narco state. there are high officials throughout the region and afghanistan involved in this. it's extremely pernicious. >> to countries like iran or north korea work in coordination with? >> will speak to the area. not as a matter of state policy. thanks, iran has a strong recently affect the counternarcotics effort and i know that because it's on the order with afghanistan and we have opportunity to understand what's happening over there. i think you'd find if you ask the dea that a rant can very affect getting counternarcotics.

on the other hand, and all the states in the region there are high officials that are not averse to being part of the process. >> at earl, in regards to syria, is very dear or is their planning as to if and when assad falls, religious cleansing, ethnic cleansing and the danger that shows us. >> there is a great deal of danger in the endgame scenario. of course i am not a syria expert, but i watch it closely. the closest analog is seeking back during the balkans in the 1990s when we had competing ethnic demographic religious groups that really turned the balkans into a night air for the

better part of 10 years. we saw 100,000 killed, 2 million people push across borders, one in bosnia, i think unfortunately that's the future is area. after the assad regime posed to its great potential for revenge killing, interreligious conflict between various segment of the population and it's difficult to see syria going back together again very easily. >> general kelley, this is an overall general question, which is what you see is other than a cyberdiscussions, what is the greatest threat coming out of socom? to our nation. >> clearly in my mind it's the trafficking not work do people

write on and potentially what ends of mass destruction. the concern that we are withdrawing with the lack of entries to continue to revoke were doing. they want us in their lives, even the countries not so friendly benefit from what we do there not only the nature of trade, betrayed in general. this is the two issues. >> admiral, as we look forward intranet, one of discussion on the budget and federal facilities in eucom necessary as they look for danger is coming from in years ahead.

do you believe our partnership hearing offers will result in a smaller u.s. footprint or is this something where having the flexibility to make those decisions as to where changes are made, would that be of assistance to you? >> esn acid two quick answers. just for divine if you recall 20 or so years ago cold war, we had 450,000 troops in europe, 1200 pieces. we've come to 85% said. we've taken a great deal of infrastructure out of europe. as we talked this morning, what remains is a forward operating base surtax is to africa and central asia. having settled that, we should continue to look at a study in progress by the department to

report at the end of the year. because overtime draw down a bit further. it will depend as you said, senator partnerships, confidence and access and how we move within the nato alliance. so i think there's room for continuing this. we are positioned for the time in which we find ourselves, but i believe the downward church or jury will probably continue. in that general jacoby, a bit of the same version. what do you see as the greatest threat in norcom this or that forward other than the site repeats leaves you with every day. >> today is a set of mail and statement come work that increase vulnerability because there's a closer relationship between the home game and away game than ever before.

to that end, i worry about the area of response ability, but i've interest in all the other cocom says well. weapons of mass destruction getting into the homeland is any norcom commanders nightmare. where would that come from? whereby what a ride, what organizations, what do would seek to deliver a device like that? that means i have to be closely good with all the other intelligence agencies. i would say that we cannot take our eye off the ball in a terrorist and al qaeda. they still remain determined to attack the united states. the terrorist threat has changed over time. it's manifested up in different places in different ways, but we've had success noticeably.

tint on attacking the united states. finally, that none of this catastrophic in the homeland and making sure the department of defense is not laid in something that increasingly occupies my attention. within three major hurricanes come into wild fires wild fires and hurricanes can be the worst of those. those earlier times by the expectations of people at the department of defense is going to provide assistance. that is the panoply of things that keep me up at night. >> thank you all for your service and what you've done for our country. >> thank you, senator donnelly. sunder wicker. >> let me do a follow up. senator donnelly asked if and when assad falls his question about ethnic cleansing. if and when assad falls, does

eucom by nato have contingency plans to deal with the serious stuff biochemical weapons? >> eucom does not. though it's a wonder general mattis central command. >> can you tell us about that? >> have you take that for the record back to general mattis. >> then to follow up on senator mccain. he had an interesting line of questioning with regard to the place they are patriot battery in turkey. who put this pastry batteries there, earl? >> is a nato mission assigned to the nato alliance. there were three nations that have contributed batteries. the united states is in a place called custom tab.

germany has been a place called kinross in the dutch in a place called it donell. all of these signs southwestern turkey along the border, senator. >> was this a decision that was reached by the nato leadership or did we do that individually with those two allies of ours? >> it was a nato decision and this is the nato mission. how those are the three nations the entire 28 member nations have people that are part of this mission. the command-and-control is made up of people from different countries connected that are the operational change to order. it's very much a nato mission. >> what did it take to make that decision? >> we had to bring it into the nato council which is 28 nations represented by ambassadors in

elgin was discussed there this ambassadors back to capitals, got approval for it and then the operational task began. i would say that sounds like quite a process. but we did it in about a month. in other words, from the time the turkish nation asked for the patriots to be in place to the time to free speech or batteries or in places about a month. >> what level of unanimity was required within nato to do that? >> all 28 nations had to agree. >> do i take it from the tone of your answer to you are comfortable with our having to rely on that level of required consensus was in our past dealings with the libyan issue in currently wisteria, or has that been cumbersome and has his

team in the way of the making efficient decisions? >> of the outcome four years as nato commander for operations, and like that afghanistan, counter piracy, the current serious mission with the pastry is, the balkans. we typically got 150,000 people doing five or six operations at any given moment. all of those decisions have been done by consent this. there are times when it's frustrating and times when it takes census building just like in a deliberative body. at the back on for years, i see is reasonably effective at delivering capability. it's always going to be times when each nation must reserve the right to act immediately. the united states has done that.

i think we will continue to do that. we are not bound by nato, the one we want nato along, we go into the process and looking back on for years it's been reasonably successful at in delivering capability for operations. >> the united states has not done not with regard to syria policy. >> s. correct. it did with libya for example. tennis is a libyan operation began as a series of unilateral coalition of the ruling operations, initially the french and reddish coming u.s. units jumped in, italian came in. after 10 days to two weeks of the coalition of the willing operations, made a step up and then ran the libyan operation for the next nine months. >> regard to senator mccain's

specific questions about patriot batteries the years to knock down syria's military aircraft, this point, our position is that would require this type of nato consensus decision. >> is correct. >> and we're far from that. >> that correct. >> how is the syrian issue impacting our relationship with oscar and what is your current assessment of our military relationship with turkey? >> our current u.s. to turkey milton miller relationship is extremely strong. we operate within a wide variety of missions and they are very pro-partners. they are equally strong. turkey has a couple thousand

troops that are the bulwark of couples train and organize mission. the supreme allied commander continue to be very, very strong. >> how has this serious issue affected our relationship? >> edison pena is strongly. there's a great deal of danger and difficulty in the south and came to nato and the united states. i think his positive response from nato and the united states in both of those scenarios. >> i think your answer is with regard to our military to military relationship. is there any difference between that and our government to government relationship? >> state department would be the right people to ask, but a

affair contact with the minister of defense and foreign affairs and turkey. my impression is we are in a strong position government to government. my area is no gmail and i can testify to that. >> let me shift to the 2012 secretary-general's intel report with regard to nato. general rasmussen makes clear concerns of growing disparity between u.s. and european contributions to defend, but the growing disparity among european nations to this contribution. and i quote the secretary-general's report. the financial crisis in a declining resource is devoted to defend and many allied countries have resulted in an overreliance , especially the united states. we know that.

deficiencies in key capabilities such as an television and reconnaissance. but i'm concerned about is the lack of emphasis by some of our nato allies to the point for they may be participated in name only. do you agree with secretary general rasmussen assessment and if so, what needs to be done to correct the problem? >> i do agree with his success. the quick fixes for the nation to nato to meet their self described 2% of gdp spending goal. today only a handful of nations including the united states spent more than 21st. the majority do not do not operate in all of us should continue to talk to those nations to meet the goal said

they could increase spending. having said that, the good news is european spent about $300 billion a year on defense. that number surprises people sometimes. is still does not rise to the goal they set and is therefore does the person at or the united states of not not right it should be addressed. >> other than talk about it, there's very little else they can do. is that correct, admiral? >> this other pressure tools that can be brought to bear. >> what suggestions do you have? >> it would entail the united states withholding some of its asset for deciding to take stations in nato that effectively put pressure on nations and operational ways. we hope not to get to that point. we are continuing us to come out of this financial crisis,

especially in europe and hopeful allies will step into this up into the 2% spinning range. >> thank you very much. >> senator king. >> thank you for your testimony. i picked acerbic general kelly to follow up on a conversation. you talk about the interdiction offers that have been successful to a degree, but they are likely challenges as pseudo-sequestration and what to make sure i've got this right. last of the interdiction efforts under southern command were responsible for taking 150 to 200 tons of cocaine out of circulation. >> it is a whole of government interdiction. the department of justice,, dba, fbi, to include the police officers and agents in the united states. in the neighborhood of 150 to

200 tons we have in our hands thrown over the side. >> do you believe that is about 20% of the assad that would get into the united states would? >> is some numbers that's 20%. >> eat that to really be disruptive in the job market is. you'd really want to interdict about 70% or 80%. >> our president has given us the gold. the gold 40% to thinking as if he that much cocaine out of the flow that the network wouldn't have the profits it enjoyed for so many years and would begin to come apart. the network itself is suffered because of the profits.

>> i believe we can do much given the surface assets, takes more of the market in less takes us of the market. i think we could take much more than the 40% the president has passed us to take off by 2015. >> a key component is the use of ships and primarily of six ships you currently use that to be part of your interdiction force. >> the coast guard base began to this post in the pacific and on the caribbean side by the way we see it 14 ships a day would go a long way to crippling the effort of initial transit zone on average or get fibers x. this is a tremendous amounts.

again, socom bv economy of force for many years now have only gotten a relatively small number of coast guard and u.s. navy ships of all types. >> the five or six now significantly jeopardized to drop it down to zero or one potentially? >> yes, sir. zero or one. >> when drugs are entered to, they really the key component to the effort. >> the example i would give you is the product it's fun out of venezuela and by small aircraft typically going to be uncovered spaces, wide-open spaces of honduras might carry a ton, sometimes less than that, but roughly a ton. the profits are so lucrative a lan and take the drug off the

airplane and just bring the airplane so it's not making a return trip to them. the profits are so high. the honduran guatemalans tremendously anneal salvadorans in the effort, but the vast majority is taken up by the. i have to point out with partnerships, the french were involved, briefs were involved, and i cannot say enough about the colombians. >> that is dramatically improved with the government ongoing negotiations to resolve of award to be a stronger and stronger part of her everyday. ..

many become presidents, ministers of defense, it is all about the relationship between the military and the people of their countries. it is all about human rights. very effective. they go under if we do not find them $800,000, which i do not have.

>> $800,000. yes. the chinese are starting to bring military leadership from the hemisphere to china for military training. is that correct? >> yes, they have a wide-open program. as much as we have. but for the chinese, it is much easier. as i mentioned yesterday, a lot of the options we have similar programs in the united states. an example, the president of peru is a former graduate as a military officer from the old school of the americas. that is gone and we now have the program. but he found it to be so useful to him, the old program, that he is buying up every ctu can get in the western hemisphere portions in fort benning. the dividends are amends. but there are a few hurdles to

get money to get students in the programs. this includes attendance at schools, the army at leavenworth, the air force. it's all the schools in the united states. >> i just don't believe that we can afford to send a message that we are pulling back. that is important testimony. general jacoby, staying in the same part of the world come you talked about this relationship with mexico. >> senator, i am happy to report that we have a strong relationship with mexico. relatively recent phenomenon, i have been involved with mexico over the last decade or so. it is really in the last three to four years that our military to military engagement has become a rich exchange between equals. we change administrations and i

know that the two gentlemen who became the heads are tremendous professional officers. very eager to sustain and grow the military to military relationship. it is a very beneficial situation for both countries to do that. i am proud of what we have accomplished. >> a few very much. >> senator fisher? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, gentlemen, for being here. i thank you for your service, i appreciate what you represent as well. iran could have a ballistic missile capability of striking united states in 2015. earlier this morning, senator levens had a conversation about the threat to the east coast.

the closer relationship between a home game in an away game, we have a closer relationship than ever before. how long would it take to construct a missile force on the east coast? spirit is pretty interesting. depending on the site, whether it's on the east east coast wherever it might be. for that, it is quite a proposition and we are happy to be conducting the study that was directed and provide us visiting points. >> i noted in my home state, and

highway construction, an environmental impact statement can take five to seven years sometimes. but that apply to missile sites as well? >> i do have experience that could be affected by urgency of an increased threat. but i think it's safe to say that this is a question of years and getting this started is a good and important stat. >> but if iranians are able to have a system that can reach this country, are we already behind? >> currently as i testified, we are able to provide the defense of the entire united states from iranian threat. currently, we do not believe that that thread has resolved itself yet.

but i will say that it is my belief that iran is actively pursuing. so i think it's prudent to take steps to hedge against the evolution of that threat. >> will the missile be deployed by 2015? >> that will be part of the homeland defense. >> senator, that is the current plan. it will be deployed in europe. >> rack. >> would that help with a sense of the homeland? >> no, senator, it would not. it is strictly for defending allies in europe. >> thank you. and now, we learned that the pentagon on friday has made a decision to eliminate the deployment. >> yes, senator, that was announced on friday. >> so how does that affect europe, and how would that affect the united states as

well? doesn't make the east coast more vulnerable? you said that it does not apply to the united states. would it make the east coast more vulnerable? >> the theory of this war, which is what we were talking about, it would defend -- help to defend the united states. what has happened is general jacoby knows better than i, they have the secretary of defense that has moved this capability to the ground-based site that you were discussing with him. it will not affect europe. phases one and two and three are the ones who affect your. >> thank you. >> general kelly? >> in your opening statement you said that china is attempting to compete with the u.s. military activity in the region.

you mentioned the last economic influence. can you elaborate on that? >> yes, senator. the chinese, first and foremost, are very active in latin america commercial way. when they want to buy something, they by and large numbers. whether it is soybeans far south or oil from venezuela. they are buying up commodities. they are also very good at building things like fords and running like fords. i don't personally see a threat there. the dude is a commercial interest. they deployed this to the

region. much like our own hospital ships. tremendous goodwill. large numbers of medical procedures on people that have never seen a doctor. obviously, they want to sell those to any nation that will buy it. it is much easier, you know the frustration that her friends and partners around the world have. it is very complicated. i would offer that many of these countries that ideal at certainly get tired of waiting. they would rather buy american stuff because it's better. it's better maintained. it comes from better support packages. they get tired of waiting for it. so they go elsewhere to the russians, the other big players or the chinese.

they are trying to sell their equipment. they go into year for colleges, and they are trying in a big way. what is the ultimate goal? i think the ultimate goal is commercially, they penetrate the market the best they can. they are also looking to united states. they have certain agendas. so that is where they are ominous. as we back away and it's harder for people to buy military equipment, they go to other easier to deal with countries and china is certainly one of them. >> specifically, which countries

are most affected by the chinese influences. >> economically, or any country down there. primarily commodities. farm products, things like that. i don't think there is a soybean in south america that will be sent to china. but they all think good trading partners with a country that is willing to trade and undercut things and make it happen. again, not a threat in that regard. but certainly if we want to remain the partner of choice, we in the united states of america are certainly doing that at this level for the most part. we are doing that at the law enforcement level. many countries deal with the drug problem.

>> if i could just ask him a private businesses, private industries. picking up the slack there, are they doing so? are they being good trading partners within the country's? would that diminish the to threat of the chinese? >> we have tremendous relationships. in fact, we are the biggest traitor. but there are still restrictions on what businesses can do. hula hoops they have to get through. hurdles they have to jump it's much easier when you deal with a country that has absolutely no restriction and will do business with anyone for any reason. >> thank you, sir. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator king?

>> thank you, admiral, i am sorry that you are leaving. i'm sorry that we won't have a chance to work together. one thing that general kelly mentioned that perked my ears up. what is the chinese involvement in the management of the panel mark now. >> they have commercial managers and companies that work be either end of the panama canal. >> chinese personnel are managing it? >> many are involved in the process as well. >> thank you. >> second question. admiral, on the question of sequester, there has been a lot of discussion, if you can imagine, about it. one of the potential cures is

greater flexibility to the department of defense in terms of how it's going to be achieved. not reducing the amount, but how it will be achieved. to all three of you, would that help? or are the amounts so significant that would not be a great thing to the ability to respond to this issue? >> i think that would be very helpful. i am not the right person to do claim on that. it really is a question for the budget years in the department. speaking as an operator, i can see where it would be very helpful and allow the movement of funds across various accounts so we could better prioritize. which is what i think you he would want us to be able to do. >> would you gentleman agree? >> a different question. again, then god the end forces in europe.

in a time of fiscal austerity, reducing footprint, is there a middle ground that would allow the positioning of smaller strike forces, if you will, to respond to a situation like ben godsey as opposed to maintaining a large footprint generally? you see where i'm getting at? >> yes, sir, i do. it is not an on or off switch. we have to have a huge infrastructure or nothing. certainly, life is something you kind of dial in. as i testified earlier, i am satisfied with the current level of infrastructure that we have in europe. it has come down 85% since the height of the cold war. but there are studies in progress this year. i think by the end of this year, you will see reported to the committee and congress ideas for how we can get the best balance on that. >> one of the issues that we discussed is response time.

if you move everyone to fort benning, it will be hard to get them. >> certainly. we need these forward operating bases in the 21st century because of all the things we've talked about. >> part of what i am suggesting is not a full-blown base. a much smaller, as i say, a strike force in the neighborhood. is that a feasible option? >> i think all of those ideas could be explored. it depends on our partners. we don't have the infrastructure that we do now, we will rely on the italians, greeks, spanish, so forth. it is certainly worth considering all options as we look forward to getting the best balance and position for tax

taxpayers as well as security. >> getting a lot of areas, you'll have mentioned the criminal network. i was interested. how organized and unified is it? is a criminal network? this is reminding me of the old james bond books where there was this criminal network in the 70s, they had a boss and a set of underlings and a structure. it is that we are dealing with? are we dealing with a bunch of random bad guys? >> it is somewhere in the middle. large cartels operate in a variety of different ways. senator, this is the dark side of globalization. we live in a world where there is connection and the ability to move them the best we can. that there will be entities,

individuals, midsize groups, and they cartels that take advantage of this. if you think of the global economy as being about $60 trillion, some estimates are that are about 10% of the global economy. it is invested, if you will, in narcotics, human smuggling, cybercrime being the largest of all these areas, as well as the other things we have talked about. arms and cash etc. >> i know you have mentioned cybercrime. we don't have time to get into in detail. but i view that as the next pearl harbor risk. >> yes. >> do you share that concern? >> senator, yes, i would. former secretary leon panetta spoke about it in this term. a tremendous opportunity in the network. also vulnerabilities that exist. you know, they could have catastrophic consequences. >> one further question about

this. the criminal cartels. one of the things that scared me about your testimony is the idea of one of our state enemies, if you will. perhaps i shouldn't use that term. people who don't wish us well. working with the criminal cartel, that, to me, means that the work you are doing, general kelly, and the southern command is not only a drug issue or criminal issue, but a very serious national security issue. >> you won't get an argument from me, senator. you are exactly spot on. >> thank you. thank you, gentlemen. thank you again for your service. >> thank you very much. we will have a brief second round. i think one of our colleagues is on her way here so she can have her first-round when she gets

here. let me ask you some questions about syria. i think the administration has shown some real caution about getting more deeply involved in supplying arms, particularly to the opposition in syria. the fear has been we want to make sure who the arms have gone into. and when, as far as i am concerned, when something falls, there needs to be in place or ready to be put in place by the syrians. some kind of an interim government, which would avoid chaos and anarchy so that it doesn't fall apart or disintegrate. and that the progress needs to

be made in that direction prior to the provision of more lethal arms. that seems to have been the feeling of the administration. i understand that caution. one caveat is if turkey were willing to provide a safe zone, or to assure a safe zone with nato support along the border with syria, but inside syria, if turkey were willing to do that. but i think that we ought to support that. secondly, i favor the consideration of going after some of syria's defenses and possibly some of their capabilities as far as air goes

themselves. i think senator mccain is probably further along in this line than most of us. we have an intriguing set of questions when asked about the patriot missiles. as to whether they can essentially ascend along the border from syria to aircraft and turkish territory with the patriot missiles. your answers are illuminating. there could be that kind of protection of what i think you indicated or he indicated a 20-milewide zone or not. that is subject to some very serious consideration myself. because i think that we have to

step up the military effort against bashar al-assad in some ways. whether it is a safe zone that we help protect along the border inside of syria that is going after the air defenses. whether it is going after some of the air force. would it support the use of the patriot missiles in that manner to help protect the safe zone in turkey? excuse me, in syria along the border? >> again, i am not an expert on the country of syria from a perspective of a turkish colleague. whenever they have talked about the use of the patriots, they have been very emphatic that they would be defensive. that is the role. it is paramount in their view.

i think that they are loathe to be dragged into the syrian conflict. especially by an inadvertent incident of some kind. having said that, as i told senator mccain. the capability is there. it would have to be a turkish decision since it is their sovereign soil. it would then need to come into nato for dialogue and so forth. as i was discussing with the senator, that would require a consensus. it would be a complicated process, but i think that this range of options is certainly under discussion and a lot of the capitalist. >> would you take back that option if it isn't already under consideration? to the nato allies starting with turkey. turkey has suggested, i believe, that she would be willing to help create and protect a zone.

the narrowband where syrians could go for safety incentive across the border. it is a very interesting and important and essential argument. if there is a positive response or willingness to consider this, can you take this up with other nato countries and the possible use of those tips? >> i think it is kind of a real possibility that we ought to explore. >> yes. >> are you familiar with the man who was chosen in last few days to head up the exile opposition coalition? >> no, sir, i am not. >> is apparently a syrian american at the syrian opposition coalition.

but he has voted to leave that coalition in helped forming an interim government. it is an interesting article in today's times. a close vote. obviously, some skepticism as to whether he is the right person. that is always the case. sometimes it is the case in unanimous vote at times. unexpressed concern. but nonetheless, anything that you learn about him, if you can provide for the record, we appreciate it. >> yes, sir. >> and i will stop right there. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i was disappointed in your responses to my line of questioning. let me just get a couple of things in here for clarification. when we put in this ground-based interceptor, that was for

protection of the eastern united states and also western europe? >> senator, i believe that was the idea. >> of. >> yeah, i believe it was the idea. i believe he said that it is not something that would work -- it's not fast enough. however, that would have evidence in europe. application in europe. >> just. >> something less desirable or effective would be this missile that is ready now. >> yes. >> is that correct? >> the 1b does not have protection that the 2a has. >> yes. >> our intelligence still says

that they are going to have iran have that capability by 2015. if that timeframe, in terms of europe that i am concerned about -- so i asked the same question. in terms of this, what is your concern over that three-year time period in europe? >> we are concerned about it. we will consider the iranian movement and if it continues to move, we will need to go back and see if we can accelerate our own capabilities. it is of concern and we will track it very closely, senator. >> in terms of the united states, we have all talked about it. are you -- i read the comment that was made by general keller. he said that i am confident that

we can defend ourselves against an attack from iran. although we are not an optimum posture to do that today. i think i asked you if you are in agreement with the statement. >> senator, i am in agreement that we have the capability a limited defense right now. i think that it is not optimum. we have made some important steps forward. and i think that we need to continue to assess the threat and make sure that we stay ahead of it and not fall behind it. i think that that is a process that we are committed to. you know, i remain concerned about iran. >> i hope you do. i don't want to put you in the position or of comparing what we would have had as opposed what we could have right now in terms of the united states. we are talking about the homeland missile defense site, which would include both radars and interceptors on the east coast. i think we all agree that that

would improve the posture that we are in. in response to the question that i just now ask you from general keller. is that correct? >> certainly, exploring this is an important next step. whether it is the east coast or an alternate location, it would be increased battle space and opportunity for me to engage with threats of iran and north korea. >> so people are saying that those coming from iran to the east coast, it would take away the capability to shoot and leave a capability of that. do you agree with that? >> i think that right now, we are making it a priority to see how we can improve our tactics

and techniques and procedures. this is something that i'm very interested in continuing to evolve. there are a number of things that would contribute to this. the reliability, the upgrades, battle space, increased numbers of missiles, all of those things are at play and i think that it is a very important tactic for us to continue to pursue. >> so i think that all of you would agree with general keller and his responses? >> specifically that we are not optimum. yes, that is correct. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator and hot. senator shaheen? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to all of our panelists for being here. sure, i would like to start with you. admiral stavridis. i have the pleasure of turning

sharing the european affairs subcommittee over the last four years. foreign relationships have very much appreciated your willingness to work with us and we will miss you. >> i wonder if you could give me an update on how the new strategic concepts are working. i had a chance unturned chance to attend the summit last year. and i followed the adoption of the new strategic concept. i am very interested, given the changing role of nato, how you think that's going. >> thank you, senator. thank you for your work on the parliamentary committee in europe as well. you are one of the experts in this congress. we appreciate all you do. let me start with a concern. it is one that we have discussed and we talked about it this morning with several of your colleagues. it is the failure of nato,

almost all of the nations to meet the 2% spending. this creates a disproportionality between the united states defense contribution and the rest of nato. that concerns me over the long term. because i think it will create a sense in the united states that the european colleagues are not pulling their weight. i think that we need to continue to put a lot of pressure, particularly if europe comes out of the particular crisis, that they raise the defense spending to the 2% level. that is extremely important even as we are reducing defense spending here in the united states. so we get the resources back in balance on both sides of the linacre that is the challenge. on the positive side, in terms of the strategic concept, it has now been in place for almost three years. i think that nato is living up to this strategic concept, which is to say that we are doing crisis management operations in

places like afghanistan, where we still have 100,000 troops, piracy off the horn of africa, and we have seen privacy go down by 70%. the balkans where we have 6000 troops, 90% of them europeans many of them are operations in libya a year ago. i think that nato has answered the call when requested to go forth and be part of creating security outside of the borders of europe. the second thing is collective defense. here, i think as well, the capabilities, the integration, the balkans are a series of exercises, one of which will conduct a big one in poland this year. all of that is part of collective defense. it far as chat tackling new challenges, we have set up a special operations center.

we have a ground system that you are familiar with. we are making a lot of progress overall in for filling the strategic concept. my one worry is disproportionality and spending. and the european allies need to step up to the plate. >> i think we all appreciate the financial situation that europe has been in over the last four years. how much of your concern is related to a commitment to the burden sharing. how much of it is peer concern that once they come out of those financial situation, that commitment may not be there? >> senator, my own sense, and this is certainly a personal intuition, as they come out of the financial crisis, they will increase the defense spending. i base that on conversations that i have with the ministers

of defense, heads of state, government. there is a commitment to this alliance. as we look at the european economy, it's going to be strong. europe is one fourth of the world's gross domestic product. $15 trillion and they spend $300 billion now a year on defense. but it doesn't quite rise to the level level that it should. but i can read and see and feel is that the commitment remains strong. >> you mentioned this. and i think that we have seen some really great progress between serbia and kosovo between addressing their attentions. however, there are issues that remain. i am wondering if you can give us an update on the situation there. also, what you see in the future for the force? >> i would start looking 10 to

15 years ago. we saw disaster in the balkans compared to what we saw in syria today. during that time, we thought a thousand men and boys killed in a matter of days. we saw genocides, we saw 100,000 people killed. millions of pushed across borders, 2 million wars. instead of reaching for a gun to resolve a dispute today, nations are reaching for the telephone. they are under the auspices of the european union. we see kosovo, serbia, prime ministers at the table. their president at the table. the european union's head of foreign affairs, if you will. i think we are very close to a real settlement between kosovo and serbia. that will allow us to drawdown of forces.

today we have about 6000 there. when i came into the job four years ago, we had 15,000. in and of itself, that is something that will bear fruit. it could drive things down as early as late this year. stay tuned, i think there is more progress ahead in the balkans. >> that is very encouraging. it is also encouraging to think that hopefully if we are 15 years out from the current crisis in syria, that we might see some similar progress. >> hopefully faster. >> yes, i agree. >> that would be great. i am not sure who would like to answer the next question. but i think admiral stavridis, you had talked about how critical a relationship with poland is. i'm wondering if you could elaborate on that given our

military relationship. >> i would be glad to. the senator is one of the pillars in the alliance there. one of the most capable military individuals in eastern europe. they are full participants in all of the nato mission. the troops fight very bravely and take significant casualties. they are maintaining a full brigade. they are continuing to improve the military and one of the few nations that are increasing defense spending they are leading intellectual capital of the lines as well. they will be part of the european missile defense, and i think in every context, they are a very strong ally. the united states should remain

a bilateral focus on ice. >> thank you. my time is up. i want to close with general jacoby. talking about the positive partnerships that the new hampshire national guard guard has with el salvador. it has been positive for us and for el salvador. i would like to commend back to you. because i know that it is one of the areas that you are looking at. >> on behalf of general kelly, i will say thank you. >> i am sorry, general kelly. i misread my comment. >> thank you. >> i make a comment on this partnership program. we are all extraordinary thing for the buck and the department of defense. they go into a wide variety of

countries and held in very fundamental ways to build partnership. i think that exists today. i assure you that it does in eucom. >> thank you, general. >> i just have one topic i want to raise with you. that is testimony today in response to questions about the importance of turkey and whether it is with the patriots or their role in nato comest order for nato operations, and u.s. efforts to have a urania nuclear threat. this is a very important partnership. all the testimony is -- i would have a strong accord with this. there is a concern that i know concerns many of us. that is the relationship between turkey and israel. what is your command doing. but can the european command do to try to make a better on a

military to military level? >> you are right to be concerned about it. we are very concerned about it. both from an israeli perspective and a turkish friend perspective. this was a strong relationship before the tragic incident that caused the two of them to split apart. what we are doing to try to bring them together as a nato component. we are encouraging them to be part of the mediterranean dialogue, which is a program in nato that could allow interactions illustrate military. then in a bilateral context, whenever i go to israel or turkey, i worked very hard to try and create some activity between senior military. so that if there is another incident, for example, people can be reaching for their cell

phones and not spinning of their defense of gnats. i think the relationship, senator, i think it is slightly and marginally better than it was a year or so ago. but it is an area where nato and the united states would like to see an improved set of relationships. i am traveling to both turkey and israel in the next 45 days, and that will be on my agenda. >> that's great, thank you very much. >> yes, sir? >> senator, you could have a couple of moments of why ask a third-round question. >> okay. >> i decide to follow questions. one is on georgia. there has been a lot of discussion discussion about the potential potential membership. many of us have watched the

election in the postelection period. we are looking to see that they continue the reforms that have been started there. i'm wondering if you could give us an update. >> i can, they are a terrific partner. today they are the highest contributor in afghanistan. they have more troops there than any other non-nato nation. so they are absolutely with us in combat. i frequently go to the bethesda hospital to visit with georgians who are veterans. they stand with the nato alliance. the membership program is moving along. he continued to interact with them in a wide variety of nato context and the united states is very involved. the marine corps has taken on

working with them and it has a very much improved the georgian capabilities from a technical kind of standpoint. you are correct to focus on the political element of this. i am headed over to georgia in about two weeks and i will have a chance to meet the new leadership team over there. as well as the continued president. overall, they are moving in the right direction. they are certainly very strong contributors, and that is well regarded and well known within the nation. >> well, thank you. i am so glad to hear that assessment. hopefully you will convey to the new leadership there, as well as the president, our continued interest and scrutiny of what is happening there. >> general, you mentioned in your testimony the key role, the national guard had played.

i'm wondering if you could talk a little bit more about how important that relationship is and what it is to our success. >> thank you. the national guard is a great partner. from homeland defense where we principally guard units, the missile defense had the hundredth brigade advanced the command and control facilities for missile launch capabilities. under civil authorities where everyday the guard not only meets the needs of the citizens of the states, but is also available to support their emergency management capabilities. we are a great consumer of this

capability. i rely on the force to meet the needs of the nation. on an everyday basis, the national guard steps up and has a tremendous number of requirements the. >> thank you, we are very proud of the national guard. not just in terms of their partnership, but with all of the other great work that they have done. thank you all, thank you very much. >> senator, if i could. i do want to mention that brave men and women of north carolina remind us that even situation from homeland can be a interesting situation. we certainly appreciate the sacrifices of the airmen have made on their behalf. >> thank you for pointing that out. >> thank you, senator. i have one additional question. admiral, i have to general

jacoby about whether he supports the new missile defense approach. was which was recently announced. he support this? >> i do. >> any additional questions? >> if not, we thank you all for your service. we appreciate your testimony. it's very forthcoming and helpful. and we do think everybody that we work with and the families. thank you. >> thank you. >> coming up next on c-span2, the head of the federal housing finance agency and the state of the u.s. housing market. then chairman martin dempsey speaks about the future of u.s. engagement in the persian gulf. later, a discussion on the impact of health care expansion

on the lgbt community and those affected by hiv and aids. >> 10 years ago, the united states invaded iraq. our next "washington journal", we will talk to congresswoman barbara lee, who opposed u.s. military action in iraq. then doug collins, a freshman congressman who served as a reserve chaplain, gives his perspective on the war and veterans issues. later, virginia senator and veteran jim webb joins us as part of our spotlight on magazine series. in his recent piece in the national interest magazine, he writes about the role of congress in u.s. foreign policy. we will also take your calls and e-mails and tweets. each morning at seven eastern on c-span. >> 70,000 people have died since

the protest of bashar al-assad and syria. there was a hearing on thursday. live coverage starts at 9:45 a.m. eastern on c-span3. >> 34 years ago today, we began providing televised access to the everyday workings of congress and the federal government. the c-span networks were created by america's cable companies in 1979 and brought to you you as a public service by your television provider. >> edward demarco, the director of the federal housing finance agency testified on tuesday on the state of the housing market. and the future of fannie mae and freddie mac. this is two hours and 40 minutes. [inaudible conversations]

>> the committee will come to order it without objection. the chair has authorized recess of the committee. at any time, the chair recognizes himself for two minutes for an opening statement. i would like to start off quoting from our witnesses testimony. few of us can imagine in 2008 that we would be approaching the fifth anniversary of the placing of fannie mae and freddie mac in conservatorship. and has made limited progress to bring those government conservatorship to an end. i could not agree more. that is why i am determined that today's hearing will be a truly historic one. i am determined that this hearing will be the last time

the director edward demarco, at or his successor, will testify for this committee. before we finally and belatedly mark of a true gse reform legislation. this is legislation to abolish fannie mae and freddie mac as government-sponsored enterprises. one that would create a truly sustainable housing policy for our economy, for those seeking the goal of homeownership and sustainable for taxpayers who should never, ever be called upon again to bail out wall street. i know this is a heavy lids. especially in divided government. that is why the leadership of this administration is so critical. regrettably they have not released a reform plan and they

issued options and let it gather dust. the interested public has logged a 10 long since deleted the pdf file from the hard drives. after 4.5 years in action is no longer an option. they were at the epicenter and they were part of a tragically misguided policy to browbeat and mandate financial institutions to loan money to individuals if buy homes they cannot afford to keep. consequently, millions saw the american dream turn into an american nightmare. millions more were forced to contribute to the mother of all taxpayer bailouts. wash washington continues to function as a monopoly. today, we will talk about the fhfa to reduce the size of the gse and how to accelerate that process at the goal of repealing this in the foreseeable future and help lead us to a

sustainable housing finance system. i now will yield four minutes of the ranking member for her opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for holding this hearing. this morning on oversight, we are at a pivotal moment in the housing recovery. after a large decline in home prices in 2007, through 2011, prices are now starting to rise. housing construction is likewise. in a record 1.1 billion households were able to refinance under hud in the last year. 11 billion in income in 2012 end of fannie mae expects to report significant income when they file their annual report.

headwinds remain in the market. as many homeowners still struggling to negotiate loan modification, refinance their mortgages, and understand the terms of the many mortgage settlements that have been negotiated. it is also unfortunately rare. the private sector continues to be largely unwilling to offer mortgage credit to qualified buyers over lingering problems in the private securitization market. director edward demarco, he was here to testify before us today find themselves at the center of this important market as a conservative, fannie mae and freddie mac. now, i appreciate that this was a tough job. and that was not easy serving in active capacity for nearly four years. having said that, i am concerned

that the government has used his wide latitude to make a number of controversial decisions. including refusing to move forward the principal reduction modification, even when they were facing a benefit of the taxpayer. and states with strong consumer protection laws. i have agreed with some of his decisions. but i am concerned about this lack of accountability, particularly since many will impact the future of the secondary mortgage market. i urge my colleagues to a form that is. director edward demarco will have to continue to take it upon itself to reshape fannie mae and freddie mac outside of public scrutiny and without the input of the congress of the united

states. this committee should begin the job of considering the bipartisan reform proposals so that we can guarantee continued availability and ensure that institutions of all sizes, including community banks and credit unions are able to participate in the secondary mortgage market. moreover, i employ my colleagues to support this selected by the president to head the fha. finally, as we consider the testimony today, let us remember that this reaches beyond specific policies in regards to the gse. our purpose is not with to put him on solid footing only, but create a situation that would bring us to full force. mr. chairman, i hope this is a priority of the committee going forward. republicans are in charge.

i would hope that this committee under your leadership would provide the leadership that is necessary to reform the gse. we know of your long-standing concerns. and also the criticism that you have launched. constantly about the gse. i am hopeful you will that you will be in charge of reform for us. >> ideal background for my time. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this important hearings. i like to start off with by thinking edward demarco under teams. edward demarco should be commended for his outstanding public service. and his determination to stand up for the american tax payer

and for the american homeowner as well. he does so against a command is pressure for those who'd like to look at these enterprises as her is her own piggy banks, if you will. he plans to continue the process of transitioning some of the credit exposure outside to the private sector. so everyone can agree, i think, that having over 90% of the housing market back by the federal government is completely unsustainable. i believe the changes will allow us to examine new approaches and better ways to facilitate private sector involvement. ..